On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 12:44 +0900, Joegen E. Baclor wrote: > Hi, > > I am sure the bridge is equally as good if not a better choice than > OpenSBC. Having direct configuration link to sipxConfig, I wouldn't > doubt the bridges edge over OpenSBC in that regard. However, there > might be indeed some problems we have already solved in the OpenSBC that > would make it a faster solution now for those who couldn't wait for a > rock solid integration of the bridge to sipx mainland. Having said > this, so as not to pollute this mailing list with OpenSBC cross posts, I > just would want to get peoples sentiment if it is indeed a worth while > effort for the OpenSBC project to put more focus on being an alternative > SBC for sipX or not. I am willing to create a new mailing list > specifically for this effort as a sub group in the OpenSBC project where > seamless sipX/OpenSBC integration can be discussed and documented.
Your discussion of that on this list is most welcome - no need for you to create another list on our account at least. Indeed, if you have enough interest, there is no reason not to develop a sipXconfig plugin that generates OpenSBC configuration and provide turnkey integration such as we are developing now for sipXbridge. _______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users
